click to show more information

click to hide/show information About your Search

20121201
20121231
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)
rice has been caught up in this drama over the benghazi conflict and the deaths of americans in the assault on the u.s. consulate there. while susan rice was not responsible for security of the consulate, she did go on sunday shows and talk about the u.s. response there and she has been accused of deliberately mischaracterizing what happened. all sides -- or the white house has adamantly insisted and she has insisted that she in no way deliberately mischaracterized what happened. she was reading from unclassified talking points and nonetheless this has been caught up in a back and forth and, wolf, if i may, i'm going to read from part of her statement, her letter to the president and what she wrote in part, i am now convinced that the confirmation process will be lengthy, disruptive, and costly to you and to our most pressing national and international priorities. that tradeoff is simply not worth it to our country. the secretary of state may never be politicized. she says, i look forward to building on progress in your second term which seems to leave the door open to the po
comments five days after the attack on the outpost in benghazi. the attack killed the u.s. ambassador to libya chris stevens and three other americans. intelligence officials say they gave ambassador rice the talking points she used on the sunday shows and they took out the references to al qaeda. the "wall street journal," which our parent company owns, reports more than two dozen agencies helped edit those talking points. officials tell the journal the cia made the call to remove the al qaeda references. why? to protect intelligence sources. according to the reporting of the journal, the fbi agreed with that decision but some state department officials said it made the talking points too vegas. now fox news has learned the director of national intelligence plans to give a classified briefing on benghazi tomorrow for the entire house of representatives. for the rest of the story, catherine herridge with us from washington now. catherine? >> shepard, tomorrow on capitol hill, a second round of closed classified briefings for all the members of the house of representatives, nation's to
as planned on the deadly attack in benghazi, libya. we'll have the latest on a key independent review of that attack. plus republican lawmakers announced who will take over the senate seat held by the tea party favorite jim demint, now that he's resigning and the gop made a historic choice. details ahead on the fox report this holiday, share everything. share "not even close." share "you owe me..." share "just right." the share everything plan. shareable data across 10 devices with unlimited talk and text. hurry in for a droid razr m by motorola for $49.99. >> john: the state department reports its review of the attack on the u.s. outpost in benefiting is finished and on its way to secretary of state hillary clinton. the attack killed the u.s. am was tore to libya, chris stevens and three other americans. we're also expecting members of congress to get copies of the report. a spokeswoman says secretary clinton will not testify on capitol hill this week because she's recovering from a concussion. catherine herridge live now. how did the secretary wind up with a concussion? >> thank you
that's been appointed to review what happened in benghazi, libya, on 9/11 of this year, he is on an advisory board at the state department and one at the cia. so clearly, this man has got important matters on his desk. how exposed could we be if the chinese have access to all of his writings? >> very exposed. and this is nothing new. if you take a look at a typical burglar and he wants to break into a yard and has this hardened lock on a fence that he cannot cut through, what is he going to do? he's going to cut the chain. we're not going to go after a facility that spends billions of our tax dollars on securing their networks. we're going to go after somebody who works outside, somebody who has access to internal resources. it's called a u-turn attack. what they do is they find that weak link such as a home computer or a personal computer belonging to a former admiral or cia agent, and they attack that. they get access to that, and then they use their vpn connection inbound to get access to the same resources he would have access to or she would have access to based on the
in the benghazi incident hearing next week? >> the stipulation that you made could be applied broadly in reference to matters like that because it is all about issues of the personnel. i have not asked that question but are not going to go down pass that lead to discussions about personnel. >> the white house will not wait in one way or another? >> not today. >> given that the president is not running for reelection and -- >> barring a change in the constitution. >> and he made announcements to oppose a renewal of the assault weapons ban, why we are not say that remains a commitment? >> i said today is not the day, i believe as a father, a day to engage in the usual washington policy debates. that they will come, but today of not that day, especially as we await more information on the situation in connecticut. >> i hear what you are saying, but i went to ask a question if that's ok. >> sure. >> does the president think that the entitlement spending is on a sustainable path? >> the president believes that medicare in particular and, more broadly, our health care entitlements, need to be adjusted i
in benghazi. it was involved in attacks and planned attacks in europe. a lot of people forget they tried, actually in the 1990s to fly a plane in the eiffel tower much like what happened in new york on 9/11. so it's a very, virulent group that certainly threatens us and our allies. jenna: your expertise on this, peter, what do you think about our military intervention? we'll explain what that means in a moment. what do you think about us getting involved here? is this a good decision now with the tiling? what your thoughts? >> we need to recognize the threat and we need to prepare to do something but we need to really prepare the terrain. i'm very concerned that we're rushing into something that's very half-baked. the african force that is talked about is a little over 3300 men. which is a laughable amount when you're talking about an area the size of texas. it is not a serious force. so they need our help. they need some training but they're not adequate. so until there's really commitment to put a force in there, that can actually do something, we run the risk of jumping into something
Search Results 0 to 8 of about 9 (some duplicates have been removed)